BETWEEN THE LINES

Obama effectively pardons Hillary

Joseph Farah is founder, editor and chief executive officer of WND. He is the author or co-author of 13 books that have sold more than 5 million copies, including his latest, "The Restitution of All Things: Israel, Christians, and the End of the Age." Before launching WND as the first independent online news outlet in 1997, he served as editor in chief of major market dailies including the legendary Sacramento Union.

About Hillary Clinton’s email scandal as secretary of state, Obama said the following:

She did not jeopardize America’s national security secrets;

Politics will not influence the outcome of the massive FBI investigation and his Justice Department’s decision about possible prosecution;

She was “careless” in terms of managing her emails;

The scandal needs to be put in “perspective” because Hillary “served her country” and did an outstanding job;

“She would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy.”

Besides the obvious – that Obama is damning Hillary here with faint praise – this interview is proof that Obama is indeed interfering in a national security investigation by the FBI and signaling to his hand-picked choice for attorney general, Loretta Lynch, that he does not want her to prosecute the Democratic front-runner for the presidential nomination.

In other words, Obama has just publicly insinuated himself into the middle of a national security investigation that is supposed to be above political interference and political consideration.

That should surprise no one, of course, given the Obama administration’s history of using government to go after its political enemies and giving political allies a free pass. That’s what happened and continues to happen with the Internal Revenue Service’s treatment of tea party and church groups and the ongoing stonewalling of adjudication of several lawsuits by the Justice Department.

Anyone objectively looking at the evidence publicly available against Hillary Clinton understands the seriousness of the case. It wasn’t just a matter of “carelessness” on her part. It was a matter of knowingly violating all of the laws and regulations guiding national security secrets. Others have gone to prison for similar offenses regardless of whether they were matters of “carelessness” or not. Top officials like the secretary of state are supposed to set a higher standard for guarding secrets. They are not supposed to be “careless.”

And what does it say about someone aspiring to be president that she was “careless” in dealing with national security matters? Is that a vote of confidence? Is that a ringing endorsement?

Obama guaranteed politics will not influence the outcome of the investigation.

However, the very nature of the interview suggests just the opposite.

Here’s what he said: “I can guarantee, I can guarantee that not because I give Attorney General [Loretta] Lynch a directive, that is institutionally how we have always operated. I do not talk to the attorney general about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line and always have maintained it. I guarantee it. I guarantee that there is no political influence in any investigation conducted by the Justice Department or the FBI, not just in this case but in any case. Period. Nobody gets treated differently when it comes to the Justice Department because nobody is above the law.”

“Even if she ends up as the Democratic nominee?” Wallace asked.

“How many times do I have to say it, Chris? Guaranteed,” said Obama.

What’s wrong with that answer?

Everything.

Obama claims he doesn’t talk to the attorney general or the FBI about ongoing criminal investigations as president.

But he just did something even worse.

He gave his strong opinion publicly about the innocence of Hillary Clinton, who remains a high-profile target of such an investigation.

That strong opinion was heard by Loretta Lynch. It was heard by FBI Director James Comey. And it was heard by the entire nation on television.

Does it really matter if Obama talks privately with those people who work for him or whether he offers his strong opinion on the matter in public?

He’s shown his hand.

The president is not supposed to do that. He’s not supposed to interfere in criminal investigations.

Furthermore, if it’s true that he has not spoken to either Lynch or Comey about this case, his opinions are based only on what we all know as a result of media reports and information released to the public by the government.

Therefore, the right thing for him to do is keep his mouth shut. Obama has always had a problem doing that.

However, this time, he stepped over the line big time. Obama just used his influence with Lynch and Comey to shut down prosecution of Hillary Clinton.